The main purpose of this research is to seek for solution concerning “What does Korean diplomacy have to prepare for not only success of ‘Eurasia initiative’ but also realizing a long-range national interest constantly by collaborating with an international society, and by securing international leadership beyond the national division between two Koreas. This project, as its alternative, proposes that Korea must pursue to be “Middle power” itself. This is because “Eurasia initiative”, which the present government advocates it as one of the main foreign policies, may not be realized unless Korea becomes “Middle power”. For the purpose of integrating the Eurasia Continent into a united market and communication space among themselves, it is required to draw solidarity between countries while harmonizing interests and conflicts from a myriad of counties.
To do so, Korea must show a coherent action and intention as Middle power, and suggest a justification and agenda for the sake of international peace, stability and common prosperity. Without this kind of gradual process, Eurasia initiative is not likely to be accomplished by gathering international agreement and participation on it. Korea ought to endeavor proposing agenda and policy that all countries in the Eurasia continent could benefit equally from having no biased impartiality and sense of balance in order to vitalize Eurasia initiative.
Unfortunately, however, proposed present Eurasia initiative has only slogan rather than a concrete policy and content. Additionally, Korea does not suggest what qualification and condition they have to prepare for in order to attain it both internally and externally. If Korea can’t overcome such a limit, there would be less feasibility to realize it such as “Equal diplomacy” or “New Asia diplomacy” which was already proved failed one and ended up with short diplomatic declaration in the former governments.
This study covered what Korea has to make preparations so as to surmount this sort of limits which Korea already faces. Thus this study suggests Korea must be Middle power and there wouldn’t way to alternate it.
Ultimately, this study would explain the questions below in an attempt to overwhelm the limit that mentioned above and to alter Korea into Middle power.
First of all, what characteristics and concept of Middle power does Korea have to seek in the future? What kind of Middle power will Korea be according to various contents and international circumstance surrounding Korean peninsula? What policy implication does the example of Turkey and Kazakhstan where are already Middle powers positioned at strongpoint of the Eurasia continent give Korea to bring Eurasia initiative to a successful issue? What does Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) mean for us as one of alternatives that Korea would become Middle power through diversifying cooperative routes and balancing economically and systematically?
The reason why this study selected Turkey and Kazakhstan is that both countries are considerably crucial parts of Eurasian cooperative strategy of Korea. Both countries are located in geopolitical strongpoint such as Korea, and they seek to be Middle powers actively. Also they are on the strategic point where the interests of great powers cross over and at the same time logistics and communications network of Eurasia. In addition, they advocate being in charge of mediators to connect between Europe and Asia. Hence that means they could take a role in solidarity and communication across the Eurasia continent, and they could be regarded as cooperators of Korea.
Furthermore, the reason why this study focused on EEU is that this organization is likely to provide Korea with alternatives, which could lead Korea into Middle power in the future. Also with the fact that the industrial structure between Korea and participant countries in EEU is complimentary and they declare to integrate economic zone across the Eurasian continent, this study would consider they have mutual interest with Korean policy purpose of Eurasia initiative. The analysis about examples of a variety of Middle powers and EEU proposes that Korea is necessary for policy supplement below in order to establish international credibility, international leadership, broadening various diplomatic options and economic & systematic balance.
First of all, the qualification of being Middle powers requires not only physical condition but also coherent policy for international peace and common prosperity. However, Korea cannot be recognized as credibility and leadership of true Middle power because Korea still lacks of constant practice but they fulfilled external condition with rapid economic development in a long time.
Second, the ideological background backing national identity and sense of duty is necessary to be Middle power. But Korea still doesn’t have domestic agreement and reestablishment regarding to national identity and philosophical background to determine the midterm and long-term way. Thus there have been cases which showed limits of coherent policy and durability in accordance with a number of governments on foreign policy.
Third, the true powers of each country derive from diplomatic strategy through soft power. Korea is a representative cultural power that propagates Hallyu and has a wide range of historical and cultural heritages. However, in terms of foreign policy, they need to supplement more exquisite strategy of soft power.
Fourth, Korea must find their way in the niche diplomacy suggesting and developing creative and independent agenda. Recently, Korea also proposes a variety of the niche diplomacy and policy development vigorously. But in an attempt to be recognized as Middle power having an international leadership, more systematic and active improvement of policy and agenda setting are necessary for Korea.
Fifth, Smart diplomatic strategy combined between bilateral and multilateral relationship must be established with contribution diplomacy united between practical understanding and idealism. Korea carries out dynamic contribution diplomacy as well. But the problem on it is that current foreign policy is biased to bilateral relationship so much. Thus they need to enhance more multilateral approach than present.
Sixth, Korea is required to analyze the meaning of EEU as one of multilateral approaches’ solutions of Middle power towards the Eurasian continent. Effective action regarding to EEU is necessary to lead Eurasia initiative, and to diminish reliance to Chinese economy and balance economic influence. A great deal of experts and diplomats from Kazakhstan, Russia and Uzbekistan showed their optimistic opinions of Korean participation in EEU via unofficial interviews.
Seventh, building an image of independent international power and accumulating confidence through cooperation with near strong powers and pursuit of independent way are significantly essential. Korea also needs to enhance an image of independent power that is an alliance with U.S simultaneously.
Finally, both the success of Eurasia initiative and the feasibility that Korea could build its own independent leadership and influence in international society might be determined by whether Korea applies policy implication given by aforementioned examples of major middle powers to the strategy of Middle power.